[WikiEN-l] BADSITES Overstatement

[Ray Saintonge]

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:08:38 -0500, "The Mangoe" wrote
>> Part of the problem, Guy, is that when you say "link to external
>> harassment" you stretch things considerably. There is no meaningful
>> sense in which a citation sitting innocently in an article is
>> transformed into such a link just because someone puts up some content
>> elsewhere on the site to which someone on Wikipedia takes offense.
>> Other links are perhaps not so innocent, but the work needed to dig
>> them up really takes the sting out of them.
>>     
> That applies, as far as I can tell, to slightly fewer than half a
> dozen articles, and in every case editorial common sense rapidly
> prevailed.
>
> How about the 180 or so links to Wikipedia Review scattered around
> the project?  None of them in main space.
>   
That seems to be in proportion to the amount of fuss over the site.  
Without the drama I'm sure there would be fewer such links.
> Indeed, one wonders why in two separate arbitration cases the
> committee have found it necessary to underscore the fact that
> linking to external harassment is unacceptable
>> It's also an overstatement to claim that whatever mutterings go on at
>> WR are harassment, even if word of them leaks out to Wikipedia.
>>     
> I don't recall claiming that.  I do recall stating that in my view
> it is currently a cesspit, and I stand by that.  Any thread on WR
> has the potential to go downhill fast.
>   
I agree that the potential is there, but it's dangerous to block solely 
on the basis of idle speculation.
> Simple solution: don't link to sites that are substantially composed
> of harassment and attacks.
>   
The intelligent people are able to distinguish between linking to 
harassment and linking to a site.

Ec